On Tue, 12 May 2009, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 12:26 +0200, Michael Nielsen wrote:
It is a big disadvantage when testing, because the current scheme
prevents having Firefox-2 and Firefox-3 (apache-1.3, apache-2.2 etc)
installed, under package management because they contain files that
conflict, similarly with 64 bit systems, where you need to install 32bit
compatability software, they usually conflict, due to irrelevant
documentation files conflicting.
Not true; when there are identical files shared between two packages
(e.g. due to multilib) RPM does not report a conflict (the files in the
file system are reference counted and are only unlinked when the last
package is removed from the system).
E.g.:
# rpm --qf="%{name}-%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}\n"
-qf /usr/share/doc/device-mapper-1.02.28/README
device-mapper-1.02.28-2.el5.i386
device-mapper-1.02.28-2.el5.x86_64
That's not a correct example.
The above example is of multilib files, not of conflicting files.
rpm does track conflicts and it does keep you from installing if you have
actually conflicting files.
a file conflict is two pkgs owning the same file where the file is not:
1. identical between the two pkgs
2. not a 64bit or 32bit binary when the other file is the matching 64bit
or 32bit binary.
-sv
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
